 |
April/May 1994, Page 3 Letters to the Editor Letters to the editor are selected and edited on the basis of relevance, accuracy, taste and available space. The editors do not have facilities to respond to individual letters, or to clear in advance published letters, as edited, with the writers.
Seeing the LightYou are to be commended for your excellent analysis of Senate votes affecting Israel. You have really made it so much easier for us to determine who deserves our support in the upcoming elections. Who says your Report was a worthless rag? Morris J. Amitay, Treasurer, Washington Political Action Committee, Washington, DC Must have been the director of one of the other 115 deceptively named pro-Israel PACs besides yours. It's too bad that AIPAC, with its present 45 employees, can't produce something equally useful for you. You'll be pleased to know that anyone can purchase for $45 a computerized record of Senate and House votes on Middle East issues going back to 1975 from Kel-Wes Innovations, tel. (703) 538-2683. We 71 be sharing a complete record and analysis of House votes on the Middle East in our June issue with you and the tens of millions of Americans who loathe the PACs and lobbyists who seek to bribe members of Congress to vote against the wishes and the best interests of their constituents. Those coerced votes on Middle East policy get American service people killed, pick the pockets of U. S. taxpayers to subsidize Israeli extremism, help perpetuate injustice and bloodshed in the Mideast, and make it a difficult place for Americans to do business and a dangerous place for Americans to visit. However, your letter sheds some light on why your former employer, the late Sen. Abraham Ribicoff of Connecticut, later said that AIPAC pressure tactics, when you were its executive director prior to 1980, "do a disservice to the U. S., to Israel and the Jewish community. "
Thanks for Helping BosniaAs the director of the Bosnia-Hercegovina Relief Fund, I am writing to request you to include the attached announcement in the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, appealing for help for Bosnia-Hercegovina's Muslim community. All of us from Bosnia-Hercegovina appreciate your publication's informative and caring coverage of our country's victimization, and hope you will continue to keep the issue before your readers' eyes. Thank you in advance for your help. Kerim Reis, Director, Ontario, Canada, tel./fax (416) 255-3886
Bosnia Relief Appeal(attachment to letter above) Most of Bosnia-Hercegovina's 2 million Muslims who have survived so far today are either languishing in refugee camps abroad or in vulnerable "safe zones" in their country. All are in great straits. The all-volunteer Bosnia-Hercegovina Relief Fund is active in shipping badly needed aid in the form of food, medicine, shelter, and clothing to help the Muslim victims survive the tragedy and persecution that have befallen them. If you can help this humanitarian activity, please send your contribution to: Bosnia-Hercegovina Relief Fund, 75 Birmingham St., Toronto, Etobicoke, Ontario M8V 2C3 Canada
Bosnian Relief in MichiganThe members of our association are Bosnians and Americans associated with Bosnia through work, knowledge or origin, from Michigan and other states. The humanitarian activities of our association are based solely on the voluntary work of our members and of other friends of Bosnia. We help find placement and free treatment for sick and wounded Bosnians in U.S. hospitals; provide care and support for these victims during and after their medical treatment; provide housing, financial support and complete care during their recuperation or until their return to Bosnia. After (pro-bono) medical treatment in hospitals, patients are unable to go back to Bosnia for obvious reasons. So we formed a regional center in Detroit to take care of a group of such patients. The numbers are steadily increasing, and now we have about 20 patients to take care of. The arrival from Bosnia of about 200 survivors of the concentration camps has made our financial burden even heavier (although these refugees receive some support from the U.S. government). The wounded children, women and men receive no help and rely solely on us. We are seeking your support and a continuous cooperation. We are asking for urgent financial or material assistance that will specifically help provide the basis for:
Even a small contribution, sent in regular intervals, would be of extraordinary help to us. All contributions are tax deductible. Identification number: 38-3079742. Neven Hadzijahic, MD, President, American Bosnian-Hercegovinian Association, 38564 Harbor Lane, Clinton Township, MI 48038, tel. (313) 769-7866, fax (313) 971-4968
The New World DisorderYour magazine has been exemplary in its coverage of the Bosnian crisis, but has not been sufficiently critical of the administration's inaction. The U.S. illustrates the penury of its policy in this tragedy by denying the victims the arms necessary to defend themselves, resisting a determined military response and reiterating pacifist platitudes while the carnage continues, content to rely on vacuous rhetoric and sympathetic sermons. Former threats to intervene and end the aggression now resound with a sepulchral tonality, as, for all intents and purposes, Bosnia has been written off as a lost cause. The time for diplomacy in the Bosnian crisis was over a year ago, when the Serbian sharks were circling their prey, the Muslims and Croatians. To continue the charade of conversing with the Serbs whilst they are in the midst of a bacchanalian feeding frenzy is disingenuous at best. The administration had the temerity to dispatch a token force to Macedonia, to witness the slaughter at a safe distance and proclaim, sanctimoniously, that it is preventing an escalation of hostilities. Thus does the Christian West portray itself as Savior of the Muslims. Such is the "politics of meaning," the credo of the White House. The West has emasculated itself, morally, in this crisis and Bosnia has acquired the dubious honor of being the site for the consecration of the New World Disorder, giving license to anarchy and genocide. Whatever the outcome, we can be certain of a higher justice that will hold all those, involved and uninvolved, accountable, and offer redress to the innocent. Nazim Karim (Fellow of the Academy for Judaic, Christian and Islamic Studies, Inc.), Anaheim, CA By now things have improved a little, thanks to the indignation of thousands of Americans like you who took the time to express their horror at the administration's moral lapse. However, the U.N. embargo that prevents the legitimate multi-sectarian government from importing arms to defend its people remains to be lifted. Let's hope that by the time this issue reaches our readers, the U. S. will have learned that it must lead, since no one else will.
Discrimination in DeathWe are told that in death all human beings are equal. That is not exactly true as I read in a foreign newspaper that a group of U.S. congressmen had traveled from Washington to Damascus, Syria and to south Lebanon, to gather information on six Israeli soldiers who died as a result of the Israeli conquest of Lebanon in 1982 and beyond, and their exact fate was still unknown. The U.S. congressmen were well received by the Syrian and Lebanese governments and provided with all possible cooperation to fulfill their mission. However, as they attempted to meet with the leadership of the Hezbollah (Party of God), in south Lebanon, their attempts were met with profound contempt. It is believed that Hezbollah has the six bodies of the Israeli soldiers, or at least some of them. In a press conference held in the Lebanese city of Sidon, Hezbollah's spokesman declared that his party was willing to meet with the Red Cross or any other truly neutral organization to settle the matter, but not with U.S. congressmen, who were not impartial, according to the spokesman. As I read all of the above and more, I could not shy away from questions that kept disturbing my mind and soul: Why do those same U.S. congressmen not show some sense of humanity toward the fate of thousands upon thousands of Lebanese and Palestinian civilians who were dragged by the Israeli army from their homes in Lebanon and transferred in truckloads, like animals, to prison camps in Israel? The world has seen many military conflicts in the last 30 years. As a result, thousands of people have disappeared. Some of them are assumed dead. Others are assumed missing. Why do U.S. congressmen not trot the four corners of the globe in "humanitarian efforts" to recover the bodies of the dead and to deliver the missing ones, regardless of their nationalities, creed, race, gender, religion or color? Assuming we have no serious problems in the U.S., does not the American way dictate that our "good" congressmen, who traveled to Syria and Lebanon, do likewise for every country that has experienced the misery and anguish of war? Do not the basic tenets of religion, ethics, morality or just simple human decency dictate that our congressmen do just that? Why do only the six Israeli dead (or missing) soldiers matter to them? Isn't this racism, even in death? Name withheld at writer's request, OH We really don't like to withhold names but since you put your name on your letter to us, we'll do so. What a fascinating country we live in. We know you're not afraid of the U. S. government, or of your representatives in Congress, but you are concerned about personal reprisals for signing your name to criticism of one of the world's smallest countries situated seven time zones away from your home in the Midwest. That's power, or the perception of it!
"Tightening the Screws"?I was disappointed with the Washington Report for crediting Mr. Clinton with "tightening the screws" on Israel when he informed them that the U.S. will be deducting about $437 million from the loan guarantees for violating the terms of the loan. I hope in the future, for the credibility of the Washington Report, you try to dig beneath to determine what is really going on. I rely on the Washington Report for the "other side of the story" and I want to continue doing that. Given Israel's record of having all its U.S. loans forgiven one way or the other, it now is clear that Clinton's "deduction" of the nearly $500 million was nothing more than a scheme to convert the loans to an outright grant. They wanted to find an excuse first so the Israeli lobby, with Vice President Al Gore as its "honorary chairman," came up with the " redeployment" of the Israeli forces. Never mind that the cost of such redeployment has not even been determined. Never mind that the scope of the redeployment itself has not been defined and it may not take place. This is similar to someone contemplating building a house and before any construction plans have been completed or the cost determined, a bank rushes togive the owner a generous gift to build it. The only time a bank will do such a thing is when a gun is held at the banker's head. The Israelis and their supporters must be holding a bazooka at the heads of our leaders. President Clinton and Vice President Gore campaigned on the slogan "it is time for change; it is time for them [Republicans] to go. " In Washington nothing has changed. It is business as usual. It is time for the Democrats to go too. Fauzi Tayim, Westerville, OH
The Cost of Aid to IsraelThere has been a certain amount of confusion in these columns, to which I may have contributed, about the amounts of U.S. aid to Israel and the costs of this aid to the U.S. The numbers for these are widely different. The first category includes direct aid to Israel in the form of grants and U.S. guaranteed loans. In including guarantees of loans in the category of aid, such as the current $10 billion over five years, it must be recalled that the pledges of $2 billion in aid over five years to the occupied territories made by the several donor countries will be in the form of loans, albeit some in the form of "soft" loans with negotiable terms of repayment. On the basis of direct grants and loan guarantees, the amount of aid to Israel in the current fiscal year is reckoned as $6.3 billion. The calculation of the current costs of aid to Israel should not include projected future costs resulting from possible default on the $10 billion in private loans being raised by Israel, under the guarantees, because so far there has been no default. On the other hand, the compound interest on the money borrowed by the U. S. Treasury in order to provide the funds for the direct grants and forgiven loans to Israel through the years must be included among current costs in any rigorous accounting. From the beginning of aid to Israel in 1949 through the end of the current fiscal year 1994, the Treasury has borrowed $99.2 billion to finance forgiven debts and direct grants (some $60 billion) and compound interest on them. The operation has cost the Treasury $6.3 billion in interest on the borrowed money in the current fiscal year. The interest is included in the federal budget deficit for FY 1994. The cost to American taxpayers this year for aid to Israel, past and present, is thus $10.6 billion, including $4.3 in direct aid plus the interest on the $99.2 billion. Because of the exponential nature of the growth of compound interest, the cost of aid to Israel because on past grants will inevitably grow in coming years. Frank Collins, Woodbridge, VA We appreciate your updating and clarification, which is consistent with the table we carry in each issue (page 80 of this issue). The table, in turn, is based upon your landmark analysis of the cost Of Israel to U. S. taxpayers in the March 1993 issue of the Washington Report. The problem is not with the figures, but how they are presented. Since Israel has never repaid a U.S. government loan, we're assuming the entire $10 billion in U.S. government loan guarantees, extended at the rate of $2 billion per year, will, eventually, be paid by the U. S. taxpayer as a result of actions by the U. S. Congress. 77tat's why we are adding it to this fiscal year's $4.2 71 billion (plus $50 million in interest since the U.S. makes most of the military and economic aid available in the first month of the fiscal year instead of quarterly as with all other U.S. foreign aid) for a 1994 total of $6321 billion. In our total we are not including the interest on past aid to Israel because it's an expenditure that cannot be halted or recouped, even if Congress belatedly comes to its senses and stops further unconditional grants to Israel. Our way, the $6321 billion comes to $17,317,808 per day. Your way, the $10.6 billion comes to $29,041,095 per day, seven days a week. Either way, it's too much.
Secularism Has Its Own TheologyAs of late you are recommending "secular governments" for all countries where there is more than one major religious group. I know what you are driving at, and I basically agree with you. But as stated, this idea loses its validity, since "secularism" itself soon takes on all the earmarks of a religion. Secularism constitutes a way of life based on ultimate values, the only universal characteristic of the "world's great religions. " Secularism also has a theology of its own: God, if He exists, doesn't matter in affairs of state; revelation, if possible, is irrelevant; and morality is relative. Secularism even produces "fundamentalists." The "politically correct" and the radical feminists (both of whom I agree with in a number of ways) are examples of that in our society. Our American government, according to the documents which inform it, was not founded to be a secular state. It was to be a non-sectarian state, in which no religion (clearly meaning in the context of the documents and the times "church" and by extension "religious organization") was established. Our government was originally designed to strive toward neutrality, respecting the values of each religious identity or group, from secular humanist to ultra-spiritual. It was to operate on the general consensus of values held by the people. Our courts, however, have gradually transformed our government into a secular state, and today it operates largely on the principles of (religious) secularism. What will work, I believe, in the Middle East, say in a country like Palestine, is a genuinely non-sectarian state. Muslims and Christians there share enough values to create a workable constitution and functioning laws. And as a committed supporter of a Palestinian state, I pray their future is bright. God knows they deserve a break! Isaac Melton, editor, DOXA Magazine,Canones, NM We'll rethink our perhaps too casual use of the word "secular" when we may, indeed, mean "non-sectarian. " However, we must point out that the PLO has called for a "democratic secular state " and the modem Republic of Turkey was founded by Mustafa Kemal Ataturk as a secular state.
Two Media Views of NetanyahuEnclosed are two newspaper stories that are an interesting contrast in the reporting of the Benyamin Netanyahu speech and question session given on Jan. 20, at Hobart and William Smith College in Geneva, New York. The Rochester Democrat and Chronicle reported only the content of the 30-minute speech. The Finger Lakes Times of Geneva accurately captured the hour and twenty minutes of confrontational and challenging questions. The Rochester paper has been subjected to economic threats in lengthy meetings of criticism by the local CAMERA chapter, for "being anti-Israel. " The Finger Lakes Times is, I suspect, as yet unaware of the nuisance of being summoned to attend meetings to discuss latent anti-Semitism or other alleged character defects of their staff. Whether or not you find a way to use these two accounts, I'd like to add some information I gleaned while attending the talk. The student on my left said that Netanyahu's appearance was funded by a student's father, a Mr. Eisenberg, who reportedly paid-a $15,000 fee and flew Netanyahu and his bodyguards in a private airplane. By making the appearance a gift to Hobart, the $15,000 donation to Netanyahu's Likud party in Israel presumably became deductible from Mr. Eisenberg's U. S. taxes. I was pleased to ask the second question: did Netanyahu. favor the immediate release of Jonathan Pollard? He declared that Pollard made a "tragic mistake" and was badly advised. He said that Pollard is unjustly imprisoned and should be released immediately. At that moment, someone behind me shouted "He is a traitor," an outburst that did not amuse Netanyahu's bodyguards. When asked, relative to the Pollard affair, what he thought of the lengthy solitary confinement in Israel of Mordechai Vanunu, Netanyahu said that if the confinement were inhumane, he would object to that; but the crime of Vanunu is deserving of the sentence given. Later on, in discussing Israel's nuclear advantage, he said out of the side of his mouth, "Of course, you didn't hear that here. " Netanyahu's trademark is to give 10- to 20-minute answers that recite the entire official Zionist history of everything. He quoted rather outrageously from Mark Twain's Innocents Abroad to characterize Palestine and the Arabs living there before the wonders of Zionism. Twain's humor, however, was designed not to put down the Arabs and their country as Netanyahu did, but to contrast the everyday life in the Palestine of 1867 with the florid images of the holy land in illustrated family Bibles of the time. Ronald C. Johnson, Pittsford, NY An interesting contrast is provided by the two local newspaper reports of the same meeting, one in a brow-beaten metropolitan daily, presumably based upon a handout, and the other a report of what actually happened by a reporter who actually was there. Along with your illuminating account of the funding arrangements, carried by neither newspaper, it's a classic example of the free media ride routinely given to Israelis raising tax-exempt U. S. funds for political activities in Israel while filling American audiences with mythinformation. It's not a media conspiracy, but the end results are the same.
Your Goals Help Us AllWith so many Bowl games being played today I don't know how I happened to pick up the Nov. 15 American Educational Trust "report to stockholders" and concentrate for the entire reading. Well, I did and it contains enough exciting news to prompt an instant reply. Everything within is both timely and interesting. It is a history of the Washington Report that I'll file and use as reference. I'm sure that there are many people out there who have not found the Washington Report and are wallowing around the stacks in libraries-just as I did-trying to find just one reference that they can use in a letter requiring factual data. I appreciate having the source on my coffee table. As for your goals for the year, I defy any "stockholder" to pass up the opportunity to contribute to these tools (goals) that we all will be able to use. This very date I could use goal #1 (" index) to help in a project that is causing me to finger through past issues. As for your forthcoming book of " Seeing the Light" articles that have appeared over the years in the Washington Report, it should be very interesting. I got my start with Jim Ennes' book Assault on the Liberty. From that point, I was off to the library and anywhere that I thought I'd find the truth about whether this cover-up was an isolated episode or whether there possibly were other instances where citizens were not being made privy to the facts. That book started me digging and now, with your magazine, I know where to look. Thanks for your efforts at keeping the information concerning the Middle East in one monthly location. David Platt, Novato, CA New subscribers who didn't get our several-page Nov. 15 "Report to our Stockholders, " meaning Washington Report subscribers, are welcome to ask for one at no charge with any book order.
Armenian Massacres ClarificationI am writing you to clarify my point in my letter to the editor in your January 1994 issue titled "Don't Question the Genocide. " I stated that until Turkey can accept and recognize the genocide of 1.5 million Armenians committed by the government of Turkey (1915-1916), the world community, and your magazine, should not trust, believe and speak positively of the "Turkish model of development. " I further said that we should "just ask the Kurds" (and we should do just that). The Kurds of southeastern Turkey (Kurdistan) have been continually persecuted and denied basic human rights since the beginning of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk's "Modern Turkey." The persecution of minorities in Turkey did not end with the Armenian genocide, but continued with the attempted destruction and assimilation of the Kurdish people (Kurdish radio broadcasts are illegal today). In fact the book A People Without a Country: The Kurds and Kurdistan (on your American Educational Trust book list) describes the atrocities committed by Turkey against the Kurds and Armenians. This is why I wrote "Just Ask the Kurds. " The assumption you made that this was a reference to Kurdish participation in the massacres was mistaken and I hope I have clarified my point. It is true as you have stated that some Kurds did take part in the Armenian genocide. These people, how ever, were not representative of the Kurdish people. Furthermore, all the people who did the killing were organized, recruited, and supported by the highest officials in the Turkish government. I was very impressed with the way you have covered the genocide in Bosnia. But when all the Muslims have been ethnically cleansed or murdered will your reporters refer to this time as "the great Bosnian deportations" (as did Michael Collins Dunn with the Armenians)? And when someone writes you a letter saying not to question the genocide will you say that "there are bitter disputes as to why the Bosnians were killed, how many Bosnians died and perhaps who, " as you have done with the Armenians? After the Bosnian (Armenian) genocide when virtually no Muslims (Armenians) live in Bosnia (Turkey) will you question it and entertain Serb (Turkish) reasons for the extermination of the Muslims (Armenians)? You have done this with the Armenians. You said that in this case "those who don't forget the past are doomed to repeat it. " When Bosnia is emptied of Muslims, will you also say to the scarred Bosnian refugees around the world to forget the crime of genocide? After, will you write articles on the "Serbian Model of Development" ("Turkish Model of Development") even though the Serbs (Turkey) will not recognize the genocide of the Bosnian Muslims (Armenians)? Will you recall your bumper stickers from your readers because when the genocide is over we must forget it"? Please don't do that to the Bosnians and please use the same set of values for ALL peoples. Steven Movsesian, Northridge, CA Perhaps what we unsuccessfully tried to convey in our response to your previous letter is that gnawing feeling that, with space at a premium, we feel compelled to donate more of it right now to attempts to prevent current and potential slaughter, as in Bosnia, Kashmir, Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Annenial/Azerbaijan and Israel/Palestine than to set the record straight on past slaughter. That said, your points are well taken and we will not ignore them.
"Don't Question the Genocide"I am submitting a short article for your letters in response to "Don't Question the Genocide" in the January 1994 issue, page 94. It's a little long but I couldn't reduce it without losing information that I thought important to the subject. I hope you find the article interesting and publish it. I remain a devoted reader. Freeman G. Lee, Afton, VA Your informative letter explaining the Turkish viewpoint is one of a varied selection of responses to Mr. Movsesian's letter in our January issue and our previous comments on "the Armenian Question. " Some are casual, some scholarly, and one is eye-popping in its implications. Clearly this is a wound that time is not healing. We 71 try to prepare a "two views, " or maybe three or four, on the Armenian-Turkish dispute, as we have on the Armenian/Azerbaijan dispute and on the Kurds Of Turkey, Iraq and Iran.
The Beauty of KashmirI have read with interest your articles concerning Kashmir, a place matched for scenic beauty by few places in the world. It is a region of sparkling rivers and lakes, lush forests and meadows and towering snowcapped mountains. The people of this region should be allowed to decide if they want to join India or Pakistan or become an independent state. Personally, I believe they would choose an independent state. I have made seven trips to India and find the articles by M. M. Ali about India's problems interesting. The subcontinent has many problems that only patience, time and education will solve. I always look forward to my next issue of the Washington Report. I read it from cover to cover. It is the best publication on the Middle East. Ray F. Dively, Baden, PA
Opening Media MindsFor the past eight or nine months I have been writing every week or 10 days to the six top executives who are listed in the masthead of the Seattle Times. I give them a report card on how they are doing on news coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian problem, and on their even-handedness with a grade in each-A to E. In addition, I discuss what they are, or are not covering. Currently it is that they are reporting only what and not a thing about the why. I sent each of them a Christmas memo along with a present-a subscription to the Washington Report for a year to each. I am enclosing my check and their names and addresses. John S. O'Connor, Seattle, WA Recently we did an interview at a radio station in San Francisco. 7he host asked afterward if we would leave the copy of the Washington Report we'd brought with us. Since we were going directly to another station, we demurred, saying we could tell from his questions that he already was a subscriber. "Oh yes, " he said. "But when the station copy comes the manager takes it home first and sometimes he doesn't bring it back until a week later. " Another Washington, DC radio reporter who interviews us from time to time used to borrow the magazine from a colleague's desk to read during her lunch hours. Both radio interviewers, it turned out, are cover-to-cover readers who never had their own subscriptions. It's either a commentary on media pay or, more likely, a kind of unconscious inner voice of media arrogance that says I'm a journalist so I don't have to pay for subscriptions. " (We hear that voice whispering in our own ears, from time to time.) So now the San Francisco talk show host and the Washington, DC reporter have subscriptions of their own, thanks to generous readers like you. We'll hope that new colleagues soon will be borrowing their copies to read, reflect upon, and finally to quote. We think what you are doing is very important. Thanks for keeping us and our readers informed.
A Grateful University LibraryThank you for the gift subscription to the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, as provided by Ms. Esperane Shatarah of Arlington, Virginia. Please pass on to Ms. Shatarah that we have made the journal available to our library users. It is housed in our political science section with other materials on the Middle East. I should note that I learned of this tide and your gift program at the American Library Association meeting in New Orleans last summer. Thank you again, and please excuse my delay in responding. Douglas A. DeLong, Acquisitions Librarian, Milner Library, Illinois State University, Normal, IL
Not So Grateful in Austin, TXSome time ago I offered a gift subscription to the Washington Report for the main library of the Austin Public Library. The periodicals librarian, Rachel Cummins, refused to accept it, saying "it was not on the list." She did say that they were getting the Near East Report, apparently published by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, which is registered to lobby for Israel in Congress. Are there any others in Austin who can exert influence to have this outrageous censorship overturned? Edwin P. Jordan, Austin, TX We're printing your letter to find out.
More About Bobby InmanThe American press has very effectively obscured the primary reason why Bobby Inman suddenly withdrew his name from consideration for secretary of defense. According to journalists, it was simply that he was too sensitive about having been criticized by the press. However, a careful reading of the transcript of his press conference on Jan. 18 suggests more specifically that he was fearful of being relentlessly targeted by Zionist elements in the press during his future service as the secretary of defense. At his press conference, Inman primarily traced his hostile relationship with William Safire to his 1981 decision as the deputy director of the CIA to limit Israel's access to American satellite photography to areas within 250 miles of Israel. After Israel bombed the Iraqi nuclear reactor, Inman checked to determine how much satellite photography had been obtained from American agencies by Israel. Having found Israel's agents had gathered photographs of areas thousands of miles beyond Israel's borders, he felt they had abused their privilege, and so he imposed this 250-mile limit. Israel's defense minister, General Sharon, rushed to Washington to challenge Inman's decision, and soon thereafter Safire tried to convince his friend William Casey, the CIA director, to overturn it. But when Casey learned that Secretary of Defense Weinberger agreed with Inman, he let the decision stand. "From that point on, if you will trace the coverage," Inman said, referring to his treatment by Safire, "it's been hostile." In his press conference Inman also discussed his positive relationship with the press-The New York Times included-as an unofficial consultant to prevent the inadvertent publication of information harmful to American intelligence and diplomatic interests. According to Inman, he served in this capacity while deputy director of the CIA and then on an unofficial basis in later years. As a result, Inman implied, he felt he had essentially two relationships with The New York Times: one of them potentially hostile due to Safire's animosity, and the other potentially cooperative due to his own connection as a friendly consultant with the editors. When a New York Times reporter called to ask about Inman's recent business career, obviously with an emphasis upon his problems rather than his successes, Inman asked if the slant of the article was to be entirely negative. In response, according to Inman, "he [the reporter] very quickly told me he was writing the story that his editors wanted. " When Inman read the story the next day, he later explained, "I understood clearly where things were going. " Therefore, Inman concluded, he could expect his coverage in The New York Times, as well as the rest of the American press, to reflect Safire's animosity, linked to the Zionist issue. How valid was Inman's apprehension? Does the Zionist bias influence Washington's press coverage to this extent? The success of the media following Inman's press conference in stigmatizing him as a paranoid kook with incoherent ideas at the same time it converted the issues he raised to the relatively harmless question of the freedom of the press to criticize government appointments, would suggest he was entirely on target. Edward Jayne, Kalamazoo, MI
The Media and InmanBobby Ray Inman's withdrawal as nominee for secretary of defense was a bombshell. While the Dallas Morning News printed on Jan. 19 a whole page on the story, rather than tell us what Inman said at his press conference, 90 percent of that page was devoted to what others said. Was that because part of Inman's statement disparaged a portion of the major media, especially columnist William Safire? DMN did report that Safire and Inman "had been feuding for more than a decade. " Not reported was why. It had begun in earnest on Dec. 12, 198 1, when Inman, as deputy director of the CIA, discussed with the media the widely disseminated reports of Libyan "hit teams" in the U.S. supposedly bent on assassinating a number of top U.S. officials. Scarcely reported then, as now, was what Inman said in that briefing 12 years earlier. We learned what he said only this - December, when Safire lambasted Inman for exposing that there were no "hit teams" at all. All the CIA and U.S. government's information had come from Israel's Mossad, which had no evidence. With Inman's disclosure, the story died, and Israel was deprived of many more days of its "hate Arabs" propaganda. Safire continued his attacks on Inman because Safire hates anyone in public life who refuses to be an Israeli stooge. In 1982, Inman resigned his CIA position, reportedly because he disliked CIA Director Casey's toadying to the Mossad. Inman now has disclosed that at the time he vigorously opposed giving much CIA information to Israel. Safire believes that anyone who is not pro-Israel should not be in U.S. government. Thank God for such programs as CNN's "Crossfire," which gives both sides of the story. Gip D. Oldham, Jr., Dallas TX
ABC's Arab-Bashing SoapJust when you think you've seen it all, the Arab-bashers come up with another twist. Expanding the "political correctness" of Washington's anti-Arab public officials and foreign policy makers, TV's "talking heads," video-game "Arab" villains and "Aladdin, " and the print media's "historical mythologies" and lopsided biased reporting and editorializing, we now have ABC-TV's noontime Arab-bashing soap opera "Loving." The story line moves around a dark-skinned "Arab" villain who weaves his evil plots as he vaporizes before his troubled "fair-skinned" victims, speaking in hyperbole and casting terror in their hearts. Portrayed as a crazed sexist who preys on blonde women, what could be more appropriate than interjecting a blonde floozy provocateur named "Egypt" into the script! Utilizing all the typical negative stereotypical Semitic imagery generated in America against Arabs, the show provides a feeding trough for racists and prejudice. While the ADL is scrambling around searching for anti-Semitism and racism in nooks and crannies all across the country, they're suspiciously silent about the flamboyant racism beamed across America on a major TV channel five days a week. If "Jews" and "Israel" were cast as the villains, would silence prevail? Shawria Scott, City of Industry, CA According to the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC), "Loving " is created and written by Agnes Nixon; executive producer is John Emmerich. Responsible parties: Ms. Pat Eli-Krushel, Pres., WABC-7V Daytime Programming, (212) 456-6309, fax (212) 456-6059; Ms. Chris Hikawa, YP, WABC-TV Standards and Practices, (212) 456-6499, fax (212) 456-6636 7 Lincoln Square, New York, NY 10023
Textbooks and the 1973 WarI thought you might be interested in what a textbook used in a New York City public high school has to say about the 1973 war. It is nauseating and typical of the textbooks in use. It reads like a verbatim transcription of Israeli press releases during the war. Also, whereas every single American history text we use mentions the Marshall Plan-most giving the dollar amount ($11 billion)-only a few mention U.S. aid to Israel and none mention the amount. I am a high school history teacher as well as a subscriber to your excellent magazine. Since I refuse to "teach" the Middle East through the perspective of a six-pointed prism, I've been labeled an anti-Semite. As I write this, charges have been filed against me with the Jewish Teachers Association (a sort of modern-day Sanhedrin). Although it is not an official agency of the N.Y.C. Board of Education, my employer, it could make a stink. Keep up the good work. Without sounding melodramatic, I sincerely believe that truth and justice will ultimately triumph. In the past few years there has been a noticeable shift in student opinions with regard to the Middle East. No longer is Israel spoken of in hushed and reverential terms-it's just another country and a brutal occupying one at that. Furthermore, it sucks billions from the U.S. Treasury each year. Black students are particularly irate about this. J. Melita, Great Neck, NY When you suffer, as have African Americans, you're sensitized to the suffering of others, like Palestinians. It's remarkable that an $11 billion injection of U.S. taxpayer dollars into the economies of America's World War II allies and enemies helped so much to put all of Europe back on its feet economically. An injection of some $60 billion into tiny Israel with a present population of 5 million has left it a somnolent, socialistic country whose Jewish population is emigrating as rapidly as new Jews from Russia, Central Asia and Ethiopia arrive. Instead of getting back on its feet, it lurches from one self-inflicted disaster to the next, always demanding more U.S. direct grant aid and loan guarantees. |